EDITORIAL: How I Would Handle The DC Cinematic Universe

EDITORIAL: How I Would Handle The DC Cinematic Universe

You never thought you'd see the day, but I, TheIncredibleHulksta, tell you how I'd handle the DC Cinematic Universe.

Editorial Opinion
By Hulksta - Mar 07, 2015 01:03 PM EST
Filed Under: Batman vs. Superman

So if you're someone who occasionally logs into this site, you'd know that I'm frequently the most vocal opponent of Man of Steel. I won't reiterate my thoughts as it's quite numerous and would derail this article. So keeping focused, here are things I would do if I was in charge of he DC Cinematic Universe. Now, for the sake of setting this up, in this 'pitch' Man of Steel didn't happen. We're throwing it all in the trash and starting anew.

TAKE IT SLOW

One of the biggest issues I have with the DC Cinematic Universe is that it's seemingly taking a solo Superman film and putting in Justice League characters in what should essentially be a straight up sequel to Man of Steel. The comparable Marvel equivilant is Iron Man 2, which did a lot of setting up a few characters important to the MCU. In this sense, it (arguably) made Iron Man 2 the weakest film of the MCU.

You would think that DC would have learned from Marvel's mistake. They need to take their time. I don't think many fans would have their jimmies rustled if DC established some solo films first. Part of the reason The Avengers was so well-received is that it was built towards. These characters were introduced and they had time to establish their personalities. DC should do that.

I want to know what Barry Allen is like before you introduce Clark and Bruce to his world. What is Diana thinking of this world before you thrust Hal into her way of life. These are things that in its current state, DC is like "we'll address later."

EMBRACE TELEVISION

While there are a few issues with Agents Of SHIELD, it's done a good job of representing the MCU on film. It's a nice compendium to the films, and acts as an excellent side story.

DC needs to embrace TV. There's no reason why Grant Gustin's Barry can't meet Henry Cavill's Superman. In fact, television is a great avenue to test out smaller characters before they are brought onto the big screen. Take Mockingird on Agents Of SHIELD. Clearly she could and probably will be brought into the films, but they are developing her story on the show first. I was talking before about DC taking it slow. It's entirely possible to utilize TV to introduce a few smaller characters before bringing them into a Justice League film.

GIVE THE 'TRINITY' A REST

While I want to say that I think it's odd Cyborg is getting his own film, at least WB and DC are taking a risk with the character. Sadly, this is so far down the line. They're almost leaning on Batman and Superman, knowing that these two are their primary money makers.

I'll be completely honest, I didn't need to see Superman open the DCCU. In fact, you look at Iron Man, they open the MCU with what's arguably a C-list hero. He's no Spider-Man. That said, they took a risk and tried something with the characters they had. Why can't DC open with a Red Tornado, Doctor Fate, Zatanna, or Hawkman. Hell, I would open with a Cyborg film! He's the audience lead in to thie universe. Establish Cyborg and introduce that world around him. Part of the fun of The Avengers was seeing characters like Steve, Tony, Clint, and Naasha who are semi-realistic heroes get introduced to  the world of gods and monsters, as Natasha puts it, "Clint. This is Loki. This is monsters and magic and nothing we were ever trained for."

HAVE SOME FUN!

While it may sound like I'm wanting DC and WB to be like Marvel, it's not entirely the case. I want DC and WB to do their own thing, but this awkward mesh of trying to be like Marvel and not be like Marvel at the same time is kind of ridiculous.

One area where WB and DC ought to copy is the level of fun, excitement, and humor that the MCU does so well. No to say you can't have moments of brevity, but Man of Steel very rarely seemed to enjoy and revel in i's source material. It almost seemed more intent on subverting the expectation of what Superman is moreso than actually delivering on a fun Superman movie.

James Gunn Reveals His Title For A (Hypothetical) BATMAN And SUPERMAN Team-Up Movie
Related:

James Gunn Reveals His Title For A (Hypothetical) BATMAN And SUPERMAN Team-Up Movie

BATMAN: Ben Affleck's DCEU Appearances Ranked From Worst To Best According To Rotten Tomatoes
Recommended For You:

BATMAN: Ben Affleck's DCEU Appearances Ranked From Worst To Best According To Rotten Tomatoes

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
SummersClan
SummersClan - 3/7/2015, 3:02 PM
All DCCU would be is just a carbon copy of the MCU. No thanks.

There's a reason westerns died out, they were all the same. Audiences would get burned out really fast, if both Marvel and DC came out with the same kind of movie every time.
SummersClan
SummersClan - 3/7/2015, 3:03 PM
Also, Marvel couldn't use it's A-listers at first because they couldn't use their A-listers. Not the same case with DC.
Pasto
Pasto - 3/7/2015, 3:06 PM
What @SteveRogers9 said.
Hulksta
Hulksta - 3/7/2015, 3:37 PM
@SteveRogers9 You clearly didn't read the article. derp.

@Pasto You could never read

CombatWombat
CombatWombat - 3/7/2015, 3:50 PM
I'd like to at least see Wonder Woman get a good movie before we "give the trinity a rest."
SummersClan
SummersClan - 3/7/2015, 4:48 PM
@TheIncredibleHulksta

Lets bullet point all your major points

Lighten up the tone with charm - check

Use lesser known characters first - check

Take your time, and build up to a movie - check


Yeah, doesn't sound like the MCU at all.
TheLoveDoc
TheLoveDoc - 3/7/2015, 5:01 PM
@steverogers9
Do you like Marvel? I can't tell.
TronVin
TronVin - 3/7/2015, 5:14 PM
Yes. Just what I always wanted. For this godawful Suicide Squad to be a part of the DCCU. I'm sure David Ayer would have loved to direct this.



Also, give the Trinity a rest? That would be great if Wonder Woman had countless movies. Focus on C-listers? Yes because The Flash, Green Lantern, and Aquaman had tons of movies too to warrant WB just to forego any movies about them. Also they are focusing on C-listers? Suicide Squad and Shazam movies are coming and potentially a Cyborg film as well.
Emblemmaniac
Emblemmaniac - 3/7/2015, 5:17 PM
@TheIncredibleHulksta

It is actually a smarter move on their cause to NOT connect with the DC movies like Agents of Shield and the Marvel movies does and this is why.

1. It ties the movies as well as the shows hand on what stories they can and cannot do.

2. They would get extremely big amount of shedule problem.

If we are going with an another MCU related example with Chris Pratt. He is a prominent character in Parks and Recreation, and he starred in a big comic book. To allow him to do that, he took red months off the show. So, the first ten to twelve episodes didn't have his character, Andy, at all. And they even had the season premier be in London, where Guardians of the Galaxy was being shot, so he could be in that one episode and explain his absence. So, when the flash film is being shot, Grant Gustin would have to take a large break from the show, and there's no show without him, which means that the show would have to have 13 episode seasons that start in January. The scheduling just doesn't work.

3. Do you really want low class actors on the big screen? The only ones from Arrow that really could work in a cinematic screen is the dollmaker, Peters Stormares Vertigo and Manu Bennett. Otherwize it is 100% tv acting only.

Would you really have the D listers at best from Arrow in stead of actors like Jared Leto, Margot Robbie and Will Smith???? I know i want the latter one instead

4. It would contradict Flash first episode and Man of Steels movie if they connect since Flash pilotepisode seems to claim that Flash and the metahumans is the first known with powers and man of steel have Clark and the kryptonians.

But on your editorial as a hole, well i have to agree with @steverogers9 here. Your editorial basicly says that they should do as marvel because it worked for Marvel.

But guess what... There is not only one way to make a cinematic universe.
ThePiedPiper
ThePiedPiper - 3/7/2015, 5:24 PM
Oh dear...
imkennypowers
imkennypowers - 3/7/2015, 5:43 PM
I like DC is developing their universe differently than the MCU did. The MCU used solo movies to establish their universe and build towards their team-up film, while DC is using their team-up film to establish their universe and solo movies building off it.
And when u consider the global ramifications of the events in MoS, you have to believe it'd get the attention of any existing/established superheroes, Batman especially. The Avengers was the first MCU movie where the threat was big enough to warrant/justify assembling the team. Nick Fury/SHIELD laid the groundwork in the event they were needed. That being said, I think Batman will be similar to Nick Fury/SHIELD, in that he's above the law/military, he'll do behind the scenes recon of superheroes and he'll be the mastermind who creates/forms the JL.

Regardless, your opinion of the MCU movies from a entertainment, there's no denying from a business standpoint it's been an enormous success. If WB/DC, FOX or SONY attempt to duplicate what works for Disney/Marvel, are they guaranteed the same success? HELL NO!! Kevin Feige rightfully credits Nolan's DK trilogy for really getting things started, "because it bolstered everything." The DK trilogy was a huge success, but Disney/Marvel didn't attempt to duplicate it they, followed suit, but in their own way.

What works for one company, won't always work for another. Not to mention, if Disney/Marvel, WB/DC, SONY and FOX made all their CBMs and CBtv series with the same formula, style, tone, etc. it would oversaturate the genre/market and we'd sure as shit have "superhero fatigue." For instance, in the fast food industry there isn't one blueprint for success, there's "competition" and disparity. People like variety and options. Sure, if one company does something new and has great success, other companies may attempt to imitate and follow suit in their own way, but they aren't guaranteed the same results/success in doing so.
MartiBro14
MartiBro14 - 3/7/2015, 5:50 PM
@MrNiklander not just WW but dark universe as well.
imkennypowers
imkennypowers - 3/7/2015, 5:59 PM
@Emblemmaniac - "If we are going with an another MCU related example with Chris Pratt. He is a prominent character in Parks and Recreation, and he starred in a big comic book. To allow him to do that, he took red months off the show. So, the first ten to twelve episodes didn't have his character, Andy, at all. And they even had the season premier be in London, where Guardians of the Galaxy was being shot, so he could be in that one episode and explain his absence."

Michael Schur did a wonderful job handling/explaining Pratt/Andy's absence. He said he was surprised NBC signed-off on it, so they made sure to get as much out of the two-part London premiere as possible by filming in as many locations as possible.


Pratt's absence was noticeable, but they made it work. It was nice of Pratt to fly back to film that one episode, before returning to finish filming. I loved the episode when Pratt finally returned and Andy struggled adjusting to the time difference.
unknownfacts
unknownfacts - 3/7/2015, 6:03 PM
I'll never understand the logic of criticizing a cinematic universe that has yet to fully materialize.It's like shooting a horse a quarter ways into a race.Lets see how the first phase goes before we say it's good or bad.
tonytony
tonytony - 3/7/2015, 6:16 PM
also the reason iron man opened up the mcu is because they sold all there other characters. if spiderman or xmen hadnt been sold they would havr dtattef with them. it sounds ridiculos to start with cyborg or lantern when you have 3 of the most famous superheroes Again I will say it again rubbish editorial.
AC1
AC1 - 3/7/2015, 6:57 PM
I'm cautiously optimistic about Batman v Superman, and the Iron Man 2 comparison doesn't really work for one reason - Iron Man 2 was a direct sequel to Iron Man where they crammed too much 'universe building' stuff in, while Batman v Superman is a prequel to Justice League which will show how these characters (Batman, Wonder Woman, etc.) react to Superman's emergence. As far as we're aware, the other heroes (Batman, Wonder Woman, maybe Flash) already exist in this universe, but aren't in the public eye yet - they're experienced, and now that Superman's shown the world there's more out there than they thought, they're all going to start going public. The only one that doesn't fit into that is Cyborg, because we'll be seeing him in his civilian identity, and he'll presumably be injured and upgraded either in this movie or in Justice League. If done right, it'll be incredible, and a cool new way of handling ensemble superhero movies that will also help set it apart from The Avengers.

As for the TV thing - while I've been pretty firmly rooted in the "keep them separate" mentality, there are certain things I think would've benefited had they been integrated into one universe. The main thing is, Grant Gustin's great as Barry/The Flash, and it's kind of a shame he won't be part of the cinematic Justice League, given how eager he is about the role, and the fact that he's a massive Superman fan. I do hope Ezra Miller is playing Wally instead of Barry, to at least make it less of a competition between the two. Similarly, I've grown to really like Arrow, so I find it hard to imagine another version of Oliver Queen in the DCCU, and hope they steer clear of the character while he's on TV.

Having said that, there are certain aspects that just don't work. For a start, this may seem like an unimportant reason, but you can't start a cinematic universe on TV, otherwise it's a TV universe that spun-off into film. Seeing as Arrow started in 2012, a year before Man of Steel was released, that'd mean, if it was part of that universe, that Arrow was the beginning of the DCCU. Then, when watching Arrow, there's no way you can believe an alien invasion occurring in that universe, while that's exactly what happens in Man of Steel. Also, while the Arrow version of the Suicide Squad just about works on TV (although even then the costumes suck) they're just not up to movie standard in terms of acting and screen presence - and for an unknown property like Suicide Squad, in a movie, you need to go all out and hire a very talented and/or well known cast, which they've done in the movie.
tonytony
tonytony - 3/7/2015, 8:49 PM
@dexterdickless thats how you cause fatigue. They are not going to focus on copying marvel. They have been succesful so far doing their own thing. with billions from batman and man of steel being one of the most successful reboots ever. DIversity is always a good thing.
BatHeis
BatHeis - 3/7/2015, 8:53 PM
I disagree a bit.

Slow? By the time BvS comes out, it will have nearly been 3 years since MoS.

Trinity a rest? We have never seen them interact before, and WW has never gotten a solo.

Embrace television? I'll take Ayers SS over THAT SS any day. Also, what benefit would it have? Most people who do watch Arrow and Flash probably will watch the big cbm's anyway. And AoS's ratings have proved simply being connected to the main universe doesn't bring in a shit ton of people. It wouldn't make sense from a continiuty standpoint, as both would have to go through a huge proccess to keep continiuty. Also, the shows in the Arrowverse focus on IMPORTANT JL members. Their actions and shows greatly impact the world of JL. Part of what makes AoS work so well (continiuty wise that is), is that it doesn't LARGELY effect the MCU majorly. They deal with the fallout of the MCU big events, not the other way around.

Flash and Arrow are using so many major characters, and these versions may not fit in with the versions people like MacLaren, Snyder or Ayer want. It just doesn't make sense to connect them through a continiuty standpoint, or an economic one.

Lighter tone? Eh. I loved the tone of MoS. More humor may have been in order, but DC has always been a bit darker and edgier. I'm okay with movies that really reflect that. The way I always saw the DC universe is godly beings being in a normal world. Marvel is kinda the opposite to me, more of a superheroic world with more normal powered heroes. I think Marvel really reflects their comic counterpart. Man of Steel reflected the DC Universe a bit, in the regard pf seeing the real world reacting to the godly
being Supes is.

I respect your opinion and editorial, though. Good work!
BatHeis
BatHeis - 3/7/2015, 8:56 PM
Oops, at the beiginning:

@TheIncredibleHulksta

I also want to add I never found MoS to be sad and dark. I found it to be rather charming at times. But to each their own.
BatHeis
BatHeis - 3/7/2015, 8:56 PM
*beginning
SummersClan
SummersClan - 3/7/2015, 9:24 PM
@TheLoveDoc

I prefer Marvel, but overall, I love good comicbook movies, and wish for the genre to thrive for as long as possible. That can done if the movies are different, and all the studios present us with different premises and approaches.
TucksFrom2015
TucksFrom2015 - 3/7/2015, 9:54 PM
You think Batman v. Supman is gonna be another Iron Man 2? TASM2 was basically Iron Man 2, a mystery subplot about his dad with revelations hidden implausibly in an object, his fiscally responsible blonde girlfriend breaks up with him, two weak under-developed villains that end up teaming up, one has electrical powers and the other is a cocky little billionaire - they're the same damn movie! Need I go on? The hero's introduction has him falling from the sky, he fights with his black friend, they introduce a new personal assistant character who turns out to be an ass-kicking super chick in a catsuit. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 taking every plotpoint from Iron Man 2 is another article for another time, I just think its weird you'd make that connection, and how you'd prefer a Man of Steel sequel over a DC Universe movie? Hell no!

I'd rather read an article about how WB's slate is unorthodox, Marvel gave all their characters solo films before The Avengers, but with WB's plan Aquaman and The Flash get two consecutive appearances in Dawn of Justice and Justice League leading up to their solo features in 2018 AND THEN having them appear again in JLA part 2 the following year. Thats four appearances in a row each of them, and it just seems like Marvel's plan gave their actors more downtime in between, so you never got sick of seeing too much of one character. Its probably nothing, and at least the impeccable casting of Diane Prince, Arthur Curry and Wally West means their feature films are in good hands. I'd rather see some speculation on how their individual stories weave in & out of the Justice League movies. Any thoughts?

"Yeah, I think WB/DC SHOULD try to emulate MARVEL." And how many of those stupid photos you've posted contradict that statement? you inconsistent turd.
tonytony
tonytony - 3/8/2015, 4:17 AM
@dexterdickless your comments about man of steel is like saying the only reason disney hacked sony to get spiderman back is because cap2 and guardians made 50% less than iron man 3. Or that the reason iron man is because they are not confidednt of captain america.

I dont want another marvel cinematic universe, I like that DC have differentiated themsleves both in tv series and on film. Its great to have diversity, i hated the forced humour and cringe worthy dance scenes in guardians, that stupidity is why the academy awards are pushing back on the genre. When dc was doing things they were actually thinking about changing the oscars to not let another dark knight slip through their fingers or go without recognition.

DIsney on the other hand has dumbed superhero movies down so that the 6 year old fan girls can enjoy, hence why the oscar people think superhero movies are dumb.


I cant wait for to restor the credibility that marvel has taking out of the genre with trashy movies like guardians.
neihofft
neihofft - 3/8/2015, 5:21 AM
This Dexter guy always trying to spread lies about Man of Steel because its not Golden Age Superman lol. 668 million is not a failure or disappointment to any studio. That's big money. Also...Superman Returns made what, almost 500m? That's also still giant money. Yes MoS had mixed reviews from CRITICS, it did NOT have mixed from audiences. Every major movie site, audiences rated Man of Steel just fine, over 75%. That's not mixed. That's easily the majority. Guardians didn't make much more than it did, regardless of source material. You can bring more 4 year olds to Guardians than you can Man of Steel. I don't need a shallow baby movie. Guardians was fun...but on more viewings its totally hollow. Nothing passed the surface. "academy award nominated" lmao. As if make up means ANYTHING.
Hulksta
Hulksta - 3/8/2015, 8:29 AM
@MrNiklander

It's not about length, but rather girth ;)

How is it difficult that those two crossover? I mean, really it's not impossible. In fact it's possible, and completely doable. That fact that DC hasn't shows they haven't kept up with the times.

Your logic on introducing lesser-known characters makes no sense. You go on to cite an example of a successful C-list hero being brought on film, and then say it's not possible? Uhhh, yeah I mean I don't understand that but really if Iron Man could open a cinematic universe, why can't Cyborg? Or Flash?

Breaking down the character only works if at the characters core there's something interesting beyond their standard characterization. Taking away a lot of Superman's core values isn't interesting, it's moronic.

You assume Superman is the focal point of the film. The simple fact that even the title mentions Batman means this film is going to be jumping between those two, and WW, and maybe a few other members. MAYBE, and that's a heavy emphasis, they manage to do ok, what person is going to be all excited to learn more about a character after they are crammed into this film.

I've seen those videos, they're biased in my opinion. Trying too hard to disprove the prevailing theory regarding man of steel that the Superman we saw wasn't the Superman many of us grew up with. Even the fact that DC fanboys get so butthurt by the mere suggestion that their DC Cinematic universe is not as good as it could be. Like really, do DC fanboys think people want the films to suck? Of course not. That said, have to address issues and try to fix them. If not, well, yeah.

imkennypowers
imkennypowers - 3/8/2015, 12:20 PM
@TheIncredibleHulksta - "You assume Superman is the focal point of the film. The simple fact that even the title mentions Batman means this film is going to be jumping between those two, and WW, and maybe a few other members. MAYBE, and that's a heavy emphasis, they manage to do ok, what person is going to be all excited to learn more about a character after they are crammed into this film."

This is the exact reason I want Civil War to be "Avengers: Civil War" not "Captain America: Civil War." I have no problem with the number of characters in Civil War or BvS. Like BvS will primarily focus on Batman & Superman, I want Civil War to share the focus/story between both sides of the Civil War. The "whose side are you on?" is PERFECT for marketing and advertising the movie, but it's harder to sell the "pick a side" concept if it's a Cap centric film, ya know? As of right now, Thor and Hulk are the only Avengers who will not be Civil War and it also includes the Winter Soldier, Falcon, Black Panther and Spider-Man. To me, it just makes sense to have an appropriate title and make the film about the ensemble and the teams opposing on another.

I loved Winter Soldier, which is why I want Cap to have a truly centric film. Sure Civil War could be Cap centric, but it just makes it harder to balance story/screen time among the larger cast. Give Cap a more centric film before and/or after the Infinity War movies. I know Chris Evans expiring contract and Sebastian Stan's 8 picture deal make the business side of it challenging, but it definitely seems like after Winter Soldier Evans might be more inclined/interested to sign an extension.

Also, I want the Infinity War movies to be "Marvel's Infinity War" not "Avengers: Infinity War" because in addition to the Avengers it will likely include and focus on the Guardians of the Galaxy and the Inhumans too. Neither title changes are "deal breakers" for me, I'll still watch both, just my personal preference.
1 2
View Recorder